User talk:D'Amico

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, D'Amico, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Feco

Soap opera moves of the woman's last name.

Hey, D'Amico. So that you can be further filled in on this matter, I felt that you might want to see the other discussions taking place about it, as seen with this link. I'll see you around. Flyer22 04:53, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not All Guys Named E.J. Wells are fictional

It's great that you've got the time on your hands to redirect the other E.J. Wells to the fake EJ Wells, however...E.J. Wells the musician is actually a real person, and that's his real name. Please quit hijacking the redirect page, sending folks looking for info on E.J. Wells the musician (he's had the name since 1956) to the soap opera guys page. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bocadiablo (talk • contribs) 10:51, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, E.J. Wells is also a soap character, and the majority of references in Wikipedia to the name are for the soap character. I made only one change to the redirect page (other changes were made by other users), which matched changes that had previously been made to the Talk page. What I've done this time is add the same information that many of the disambiguation pages have. Since E.J. Wells the musician is already listed as E.J. Wells (musician), it would actually be more correct for the E.J. Wells page to direct to the EJ Wells page since both are used for the character (E.J. on screen and EJ at the show's website). But now it will provide links to both pages. Wikipedia standards would have it linking to the character page -- it is incorrect for it to redirect solely to the musician. Actually, from looking at the musician's page, he seems to be refered to primarily as EJ Wells (no period), so even that page should actually be directing to EJ Wells (musician) rather than E.J. Wells (musician). D'Amico 18:50, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I think the real E.J. Wells should be flattered, I know I'd be flattered if my name was a soap character's name. As it is, the repeated moving and redirecting of an article that was created before the musician's article is abusive and uncalled for. I also think that D'Amico is being treated unfairly and with no good faith by the comments of Bocadiablo. As to the comment of "fake" ~ EJ Wells is not FAKE, he is fictional. There is a considerable difference. While Bocadiablo passion is admirable, it's also self-serving and disallows for the popularity of a fictional character who's page was created first. CelticGreen 00:54, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. ;) For whatever reason, that comment just made my day. ;) D'Amico 10:28, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome!! CelticGreen 22:12, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Families/Colleen Brady page

Because the Colleen Brady page has always had all the family, as other Days characters have, that are direct decendants and other pages have far more relatives, I added back Sami's family. I have read the talk page too and it's confusing as all heck to me and until a hard and fast decision is made, I think we can leave Colleen's family that are blood relations. What do you think? By the way, check out the Lucas Roberts page if you want to see unnecessary relations listed. CelticGreen 22:12, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Character relations

You may want to put several fictional character articles on your watchlist, if they aren't already on it. I saw your recent edits to a few of the soap opera fictional character articles (Family and relationships sections), and they've already been changed either back or in a different sort of variation of their previous form by an IP editor. Because of how those sections are changed back soon, it's the reason that I didn't bother changing those sections to what you changed them to. I mean, for the ones that I edit often and am more familiar with, if I felt that it was dire to change them, I would have though. I assume you changed some of them because Jack and Erica are no longer married to each other. Flyer22 17:54, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NOT!

I WAS NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT VANDALIZING ANYTHING! NO WONDER MANY PEOPLE THINK WIKIPEDIA IS PURE CRAP! THEY DONT WANNA CREATE ACCOUNTS! I WILL NEVER CREATE A WIKI ACCOUNT-----------------------------------NEVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! FOR THE RECORD: I WAS NOT NOT NOT VANDALIZING ANYTHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NOT!!!!!NOT!!!!!!!NOT!!!!!!NOT! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.230.108.244 (talk) 01:26, 21 October 2007 (UTC) [reply]

I would suggest viewing the Wikipedia guidelines for vandalism. The information that was added into the character page for Taylor Marone was a prime example -- a normally reliable magazine being claimed as a source for a false piece of information. Entries like that are one of the reasons that Wikipedia has gained a negative reputation, because on the surface it tooks legitimate. But anyone who picks up the magazines knows that most recent issue of SOD was the October 30, 2007, issue, which was printed and sent out prior to Tylo's son dying. There is no way that the October 19, 2007, issue (which did not exist, as they are always dated within 7 days of each other) could have contained an article on an event that had not yet occurred. D'Amico 06:04, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sami's babies

This is so going round and round. One, we have to go by the US eps because it's an American show. Second, they are calling the boy Johnny and they have officially decided on that first name for the boy. That needs to/can stay. As to issues of last name, legally Sami is Roberts at the time of birth, they can't just decide on a last name. The children are Roberts at this point. Heaven knows it's going to change, but we'll just have to roll with it. CelticGreen 17:46, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with it is that, right now, even the show itself admits that the names on the babies are up in the air. Roberts Baby Boy and Roberts Baby Girl are (as of 10/26 US) the closest we have for names. If John Roman / Johnny was the official name, that's what the bassinet would say. I have a feeling that by the time this is all said and done, the poor child will be named Stefano. (*SHIVER*) D'Amico 17:50, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Jack Boscoe

I have nominated Jack Boscoe, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jack Boscoe. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. — TAnthony^Talk 21:52, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello D'Amico! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 3 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

Derk Cheetwood - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 19:51, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of BethAnn Bonner for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article BethAnn Bonner is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BethAnn Bonner until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Bgsu98 (talk) 17:19, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Derk Cheetwood for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Derk Cheetwood is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Derk Cheetwood until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Bgsu98 (talk) 17:21, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Steve Blackwood for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Steve Blackwood is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Blackwood until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Ploni (talk) 18:53, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Chris Boothe

The article Chris Boothe has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Doesn't meet WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 09:00, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]